SIR WATKIN WILLIAMS WYNN. [To THE EDITOR OF THE "
SPECTATOR:1
SIR,—Had Mr. Asquith stated the whole truth in his reply to Mr. Morton in the House of Commons, I am certain that a journal of so high a reputation as the Spectator would never have inserted the article on Sir Watkin on May 5th. After the magistrates gave their decision, which certainly surprised many people, Sir Watkin gave notice of an appeal. It is diffi- cult to understand why the officials, to whom the Home Secre- tary applied for information, did not acquaint him with this fact, or why, if they did so, the Home Secretary omitted it from his reply in the House of Commons. It is hardly fair to speak of evidence that is going to be questioned as unquestionable. Meanwhile, I would ask your readers to suspend their judgment upon this matter, remembering that the inspector of the prose- cuting Society saw the horse within forty-eight hours of the -alleged beating, and (although an expert in such cases) stated that he could find no mark or abrasion upon the horse. Although the prosecution did not take place until seven weeks after the alleged cruelty, the summons was only delivered to Sir Watkin three or four days before the case was tried. Scant time, after so long a period had elapsed, even to remember who were present; meanwhile, those engaged in the prosecu- tion had probably not been idle. The case being still sub judice, I purposely abstain from discussing the quality of the evidence given before the magistrates. I will only add that a battle with a rearing horse is no childs-play. Sir Watkin's own father was killed by a horse rearing and falling back upon him.—I am, Sir, &c., A LOVER OF FAIR-PLAY WITHOUT FAVOUR.
[We of course were not aware, any more than Mr. Asquith, that an appeal had been entered.—En. Spectator.]